Then there’s also एनम् etc., which according to MW “Grammarians assert that the substitution of एनम् &c for इमम् or एतम् &c takes place when something is referred to which has already been mentioned in a previous part of the sentence”.

Advertisements

Related

2 Responses

Thank you for the post. I would add that one of the features of Sanskrit which might strike an English-writing/speaking person is the fact that the “that” is much more common than the “this”. Sanskrit uses “that” whenever we are generally talking about something, whereas English in such cases uses “this”.
E.g.: In “X is Z. This has been said by…” the “this” would have been a “tad”.
In other words, Sanskrit only uses etad when one is definitely speaking about something proximate. English only uses “that” when one is speaking about something whose remoteness one wants to stress.

Points of usage like this are not always apparent from reading books of grammar. And once you get used to the language, it’s easy to forget these things that were once new, and would be helpful for other learners.